> It's just the stated goal is impossible given the political RoE.
People need to keep in mind tactical versus strategic success. For Iran, the military operation was a complete tactical success, it's just that the strategic goals — assuming there were any to begin with, which seems to be an unanswered question — were not, and it was questionable whether military operations were a useful tool to achieve them at all.
“War is the continuation of policy with other means.” — Carl von Clausewitz
'What is one's stated policy / goal, and is war a useful tool for achieve it', is a question that needs to be asked by civilian leadership. Sometimes (often?) the answer is "no".
It looks like the strait is still closed, the Taliban is back in charge and Syria is run by a former ISIS fighter. I think maybe the point is that the US has put in a lot of effort and resources into these areas with no outcomes benefitting our country, or the the world even
Most southern Yemenis don't want unification. North and South Yemen were separate countries for decades. When unification first happened there was optimism but South Yemen (which is about 20% of the total population of Yemen) was always hesitant about how little political power they'd have. North Yemen is 80% of the population and, today, almost entirely controlled by the Houthis.
I don't think native Yemeni are motivated enough to fight for unification. That's why all the fighters are mercenaries hired by the UAE or Yemen
We've seen Sunni majorities in Syria and Lebanon run for generations by oppressive Shia-supremacist regimes, so while I agree that the resistance against Ansar Allah doesn't have a lot of local legitimacy, I think you have to be a little careful about reading legitimacy into the dominant power in Yemen; once a group gets the upper hand, it can be hard to shake them off. There's a whole interesting history to how Yemen got here.
